Will she or won’t she? It seems with Fed interest rate policy
remaining the only game in town, strategists are stuck with trying to
second guess Yellen’s next move at the forthcoming FOMC on 16-17
September. Of course we’ve been here before and we can look at all the
evidence and data under the sun showing that rates should have gone up
years ago and that the current ZIRP regime is counter-productive. Once
again, we don’t think Yellen will raise rates, or at least not
materially. Not because of the data, because most of that from the
upward revision in Q2 US GDP (from +4.4% to +5.9% YoY – at nominal
prices) to the fairly steady progress in employment and incomes would be
supportive of an increase. Nor do we think because of slowdown scare
stories out of China. Official China GDP data has been looking
increasingly suspect for years and the blow-off in domestic equity
prices was in large part a correction to credit fuelled speculative
bubble which the Fed ought to be attempting to unwind itself. No, we
don’t think she’ll raise because she doesn’t need to. Barring a brief
wobble on one recent bond auction, the Fed doesn’t need to offer higher
coupons to get its debt away, at least not yet. With ECB NIRP and a
suitable level of political chaos being maintained globally, the US
dollar remains well bid as do Treasuries, with yields easier across the
maturity range. With sign that manufacturing competitiveness is already
under pressure from the stronger dollar, why would Yellen want to
compound the pain with an even stronger dollar while also risking
snuffing out the credit fuelled consumption that is still keeping the US
party going. Like Carney, she’ll talk the talk on rates, but push out
the point when these are likely to impact into the year-end or beyond,
if currency markets permit.
- US private sector jobs +2.5%, average income +1.4% therefore total US private sector income +3.8%
So
what of August’s NFP numbers? At +173k MoM overall and +140k for
private sector jobs, the numbers were a little less than the >+200k
estimates preceding them, although the August holidays can sometimes
make the numbers a bit lumpy. On a YoY basis this represented an
increase of +2.2% overall and +2.5% for private sector jobs, which after
a +1.4% rise in average wages implies an approx. +3.8% YoY overall
increase in US private sector gross incomes. Not a particularly rampant
performance, but nor was it something out of line with what was being
delivered over the previous cycle and certainly not something that would
suggest the need for endless Fed life-support.
- Average hours -0.5% vs Av hourly wage +1.9%
In
terms of the components of this +1.4% YoY average wage increase, this
included a +1.9% increase in average hourly wage which was slightly down
from the approx. +2.5% being achieved earlier in the year, but a -0.5%
contraction in average hours being worked. As reductions in overtime and
hours worked can sometimes precede a more general contraction this will
no doubt be kept under review by the Fed, although as one can see from
the below chart this can also produce a number of false negatives.
- Interest sensitive industries of Auto & Construction still hiring
By
industry segment, the collapse in commodity prices has had an immediate
and heavy impact on the associated ‘mining and logging’ employment
segment (including oil) which should come as no surprise. A high US
dollar has been slow to impact manufacturing employment, which is only
just starting to tail off, while continued credit availability seems to
continue to underpin construction and Auto related areas;
notwithstanding the increasing erosion in share at the latter from
international competitors. With both these areas sensitive to credit
availability and rates, we would expect Yellen to be reticent in
adversely impacting these.
So what does this mean for
Wall Street? - More of the same, albeit perhaps with more emphasis on
acquisitions and mergers than just share buybacks. For example, for the 5
year period 2010-15, the US quoted groups under our coverage converted
approx. 71% of net income into FCF (vs 89% equivalent for 2002-07) and
spent approx. 17% on acquisitions while returning 75% back to
shareholders, with the remaining c.8% used to reduce debt.
- 71% of US FCF returned to shareholders in last 5 years
- FCF generation and capital allocation 2002-07
No comments:
Post a Comment